IVV vs NBGX
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF vs Neuberger Berman Growth ETF
Quick Verdict
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV delivered stronger 1-year returns. IVV offers more diversification with 508 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | IVV | NBGX | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03% | 0.44% | |
| AUM | $907.0B | $15M | |
| Dividend Yield | 1.10% | 0.40% | |
| Holdings | 508 | 56 | |
| YTD Return | +12.71% | +5.90% | |
| 1Y Return | +21.89% | +10.98% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +22.08% | - | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +12.96% | - | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.1% | 16.6% | |
| Max Drawdown | -56.5% | -21.6% | |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | Neuberger Berman ETF Trust | |
| Category | Equity | Equity | |
| Inception | May 15, 2000 | Dec 18, 2024 |
IVV vs NBGX Performance
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and Neuberger Berman Growth ETF (NBGX) is a ETF from Neuberger Berman ETF Trust. Over the past year IVV returned +21.89% while NBGX returned +10.98%. Year to date, IVV is up 12.71% versus a gain of 5.90% for NBGX.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
NBGX has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 16.6% compared with 15.1% for IVV. Lower volatility generally means a smoother ride, though it often comes with lower long-run returns.
The deepest peak-to-trough decline in our data was -56.5% for IVV and -21.6% for NBGX. Drawdown depth is worth weighing if you expect to sell during market stress rather than ride it out.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.95. They move almost in lockstep, so holding both mostly duplicates the same exposure.
Fees and Cost Over Time
IVV charges 0.03% per year while NBGX charges 0.44%. On a $10,000 position that is $3 vs $44 annually, a gap of $41 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IVV currently yields 1.10% against 0.40% for NBGX.
Holdings Overlap
IVV and NBGX share 43 holdings out of 516 unique holdings combined, representing a 45.5% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, IVV or NBGX?
IVV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while NBGX charges 0.44%. IVV is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $41 per year of difference.
Which performed better, IVV or NBGX?
Over the past year IVV returned +21.89% vs +10.98% for NBGX, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (2 years), IVV annualized +7.00% vs +12.77% for NBGX. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, IVV or NBGX?
NBGX has been the more volatile fund at 16.6% annualized versus 15.1% for IVV. Worst drawdown: IVV -56.5% vs NBGX -21.6%.
Should I hold both IVV and NBGX?
IVV and NBGX have a monthly-return correlation of 0.95, so they move almost identically. Holding both adds little diversification - most investors pick one, usually on fees or the specific index tracked.
What is the holdings overlap between IVV and NBGX?
IVV and NBGX share 43 common holdings with a 45.5% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 516 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, IVV or NBGX?
IVV yields 1.10% while NBGX yields 0.40%, so IVV currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Popular ETF Comparisons
Get Full ETF Analytics
Access complete holdings data, overlap analysis, screener tools, and more with FundXLS.